SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Gau) 713

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Ajit Singh, Kalyan Rai Surana, JJ.
Khurshid Alam - Appellant
Versus
Assam State Transport Corporation & 3 Ors. - Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 381 of 2016
Decided On : 18-11-2016

An employee can withdraw the application for voluntary retirement before the effective date of retirement.

Headnote:

Voluntary Retirement - Employment - The court declined to grant relief of reinstatement to the appellant who had applied for voluntary retirement and later sought to withdraw the application after the effective date of retirement. The court relied on the decision in Sambhu Murari Sinha v. Project and Development India Limited, (2000) 5 SCC 621, which held that an employee can withdraw the application for voluntary retirement before the effective date of retirement.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, an employee of the Assam State Transport Corporation, applied for voluntary retirement and later sought to withdraw the application after the effective date of retirement. The court declined to grant relief of reinstatement and directed the Corporation to pay all retirement dues to the appellant.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant's relationship of master and servant with the Corporation had ended with the effective date of voluntary retirement, and declined to grant relief of reinstatement. The court directed the Corporation to pay all retirement dues to the appellant.

Issues: The issue was whether the appellant could withdraw the application for voluntary retirement after the effective date of retirement.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the decision in Sambhu Murari Sinha v. Project and Development India Limited, (2000) 5 SCC 621, which held that an employee can withdraw the application for voluntary retirement before the effective date of retirement.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the court declined to grant relief of reinstatement to the appellant, directing the Corporation to pay all retirement dues to the appellant.

Ajit Singh; CJ.:--

1. Mr. D Das, learner senior counsel, assisted by Mr. S Borthakur, Ms. P Baruah and Mr. R Sensua, learned counsel for the appellant. Ms. U Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, Assam State Transport Corporation for Respondents.

2. Heard on admission.

3. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 29.9.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge of this High Court, whereby he has disposed of appellant’s WP(C) No. 3266/2016.

4. The appellant was an employee of the Assam State Transport Corporation (in short “Corporation”). On 25.2.2015, he applied for voluntary retirement with effect from 1.3.2016. The Managing Director of the Corporation vide order dated 26.2.2016 accepted the appellant’s prayer for voluntary retirement. Thereafter, the appellant contested the Assam Legislative Assembly Election held in 2016 as an Independent candidate. And after having lost the election, he made a representation dated 21.5.2016 for withdrawal of his application for voluntary retirement on the ground that the Corporation did not pay him his dues. Since the Corporation did not pass any favourable order on this representation of the appellant, he filed WP(C) No. 3266/2016.

5. The learned Single Judge, relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in Sambhu Murari Sinha v. Project and Development India Limited, (2000) 5 SCC 621, by the impugned order, declined to grant relief of his reinstatement. In Sambhu Murari Sinha (supra), the Supreme Court has held that an employee can withdraw his application for voluntary retirement even after it is accepted, but only before the effective date of retirement.

6. Admittedly, in the case at hand, the effective date of appellant’s voluntary retirement was 1.3.2016. Meaning thereby, the relationship of master and servant between the appellant and Corporation, came to an end with effect from that date. Thereafter, the appellant unsuccessfully contested the election of Assam Legislative Assembly. Had the appellant not retired voluntarily, he could not have fulfilled his dream of contesting the election. The appellant apparently gambled with his career. Be that as it may, the learned Single Judge has already directed the Corporation to pay all retirement dues, which the appellant is entitled for, within two months.

7. This being the situation, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top